On 12/11/18 11:15 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
I recently brought up the question of the write w/o approval
policy on the gcc list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-11/msg00165.html
looking for clarification. Except for Jeff's comment (which
I'm afraid didn't really clarify things), didn't get any.
I think "will the person who objects to my work the most be able to find a
fault with my fix?" in the policy on obviousness is clear enough. A
policy decision on what is or is not part of a language extension can't be
obvious, and nor can determining subtle questions of exactly what the
definition of some internal interface is or should be.
Anything that someone might find fault with is so broad as to
remove the ability to make the judgment in any case. Reviewers
have been known to find fault with the slightest things, from
trivial formatting nits, to punctuation in comments, to names
of variables, to the location of new tests, to ChangeLogs.
If the policy's intent is not to let people make judgment calls
then it ought to be updated. I have no proposal for changes to
it at the moment, but I don't see how anyone can reasonably
object to someone posting a patch and saying "if there are no
objections I will go ahead and commit this change because I think
it's obviously correct." If even that is against the policy then
change it to make that clear (though I sincerely hope that isn't
so).
Martin
